Best evidence for left/right/mixed-handedness

[Errata]

A majority of any given population have a preferred hand for writing, knife use, throwing..anything that requires some measure of precision, or force, during usage. A smaller group may use either hand for some of these tasks, but they will not be equally efficient or accurate with either hand. One will dominate. Ambidexters are about 1% of any given population, therefore the least likely answer when solving problems of "handed-ness".

I suggested the evidence points to a left handed killer based really on the initial attack, not the cutting. Mary was lying on her right side, facing away from her killer and towards the wall. If a knife was drawn across her throat....no medical opinion stated which side they believed the cut commenced on,....but if it was drawn across, then it had to be from her right to left by default due to the physical position of the killer in relation to Marys throat. Its unreasonable to assume he did the cut while his arm was under her neck, it doesnt physically work. Now, he could have grabbed her mouth with his left hand and as she tried to sit up on her side he slipped his right hand with the knife in it under her neck and around to the front of her throat, but lots of things could make that difficult, one being him snagging the sheets.

I agree with you that the positioning argues for the killer using his left hand to make that cut. But I don't know that means the killer was left handed, or even primarily used his left hand to use a knife. We tend to have a precision hand and a strength hand. But the two are generally not the same hand. While he absolutely would have needed his precision hand to open the pericardium, he didn't need it for the throat cut. That's a strength move. Basically, a guy who used a knife in his right hand in the previous murders could and perhaps did use his left equally well on this murder. It's really about grip. Not finesse.

There are people who are so dominant with one hand that their other hand is nigh useless. But that's more rare.

[Michael W Richards]

This is where handedness blinds us. Handedness only applies to what hand you write with. Writing is a very specific skill, it has very specific requirements. Wielding a knife to slash or stab is a different skill. Different specific requirements. And while handedness is born, and in fact genetic, knife wielding is not. It's a trained skill. Many people use a knife with the same hand they use to write. An almost equal amount do not, because their hands have developed differently. I cannot write with both hands, but I can wield a knife equally well in either hand because the strength of my interior grip (thumb and forefinger) and pinky is equal in both hands. Were it not equal, I would have a preferred hand for using a knife. But whatever hand that may be, it has no relationship at all to which hand I write with. Just like how you lace your shoes has nothing to do with the hand you write with.

This killer easily could have switched hands. Or not. Or he was right handed and a left handed slasher. Or vice versa. But the idea that he slashed with his left so he is ergo lefthanded is just false. It's not even true by a respectable majority. So the one thing we cannot do is look at what hand a man writes with, and say he is the killer because it's the same hand the killer used a knife with. We can't even say with any certainty that because this killer used his left in this murder that he used his left in all the murders. Or even most. That's just not how it works.

By the way, Europeans are more likely to be able to wield a knife in either hand than Americans because of the differences in table manners. If you do not switch the fork from the left to the right hand while eating, you are building up similar muscle structure. 20 years of doing it will give you pretty respectable left hand pinch strength. Which is the important part of wielding a knife.

A majority of any given population have a preferred hand for writing, knife use, throwing..anything that requires some measure of precision, or force, during usage. A smaller group may use either hand for some of these tasks, but they will not be equally efficient or accurate with either hand. One will dominate. Ambidexters are about 1% of any given population, therefore the least likely answer when solving problems of "handed-ness".

I suggested the evidence points to a left handed killer based really on the initial attack, not the cutting. Mary was lying on her right side, facing away from her killer and towards the wall. If a knife was drawn across her throat....no medical opinion stated which side they believed the cut commenced on,....but if it was drawn across, then it had to be from her right to left by default due to the physical position of the killer in relation to Marys throat. Its unreasonable to assume he did the cut while his arm was under her neck, it doesnt physically work. Now, he could have grabbed her mouth with his left hand and as she tried to sit up on her side he slipped his right hand with the knife in it under her neck and around to the front of her throat, but lots of things could make that difficult, one being him snagging the sheets.

[Joshua Rogan]

Another account of Stride's murder, Daily News 1st Oct 1888;

"From the position in which the body was found, it is believed that the moment the murderer had got his victim in the dark shadow near the entrance to the court he threw her to the ground, and with one gash severed her throat from ear to ear. The hypothesis that the wound was inflicted after and not before the woman fell is supported by the fact that there are severe bruises on her left temple and left cheek, this showing that force must have been used to prostrate her, which would not have been necessary had her throat been already cut."

[Jon Guy]

Wickerman has a drawing that he did illustrating your point. It,s also been pointed out to me in tge past that her nose appears to be ,,crushed,, in her morgue photo.

Hello Jon Guy.

I,m trying to resolve 2 scenarios but i agree with her being on the ground when her neck is cut:

1. The bruising occurs when the murderer holds her face with his left and cuts her throat with his right.
2. The bruising occurs when he suffocates her out with his right hand. Then, when she is on the ground, he cuts her throat.

No way to determkne if you don,t accept the bruising having occurred at her time of death, as Trevor Marriott suggests. But it was enough of a point that her examining doctor made mention of it.

Hi Robert St Devil,

Yes, I agree that the finger bruising could have been caused if she was suffocated (I agree about the flattened nose, but no mention of it made by the medico ?)

But, we don`t know for sure she was suffocated, yet we know that the killer sawed his way through the main vessels down to the bone, twice, so some leverage would have been necessary.

But, yes, I agree with your point

Are you able to repost Wickerman`s drawing ?

[Robert St Devil]

The bruising on Nichols face would actually be caused by the left hand, because the thumb bruise was on her right jaw, and the finger bruising was on the left side of her face - left hand holding head, right hand holding knife.

Wickerman has a drawing that he did illustrating your point. It,s also been pointed out to me in tge past that her nose appears to be ,,crushed,, in her morgue photo.

Hello Jon Guy.

I,m trying to resolve 2 scenarios but i agree with her being on the ground when her neck is cut:

1. The bruising occurs when the murderer holds her face with his left and cuts her throat with his right.
2. The bruising occurs when he suffocates her out with his right hand. Then, when she is on the ground, he cuts her throat.

No way to determkne if you don,t accept the bruising having occurred at her time of death, as Trevor Marriott suggests. But it was enough of a point that her examining doctor made mention of it.

[Jon Guy]

if the bruising on Nicholl,s face was caused by Jack the Ripper reaching around her... the marks described seem to indicate thatthey were made with a right hand.

The bruising on Nichols face would actually be caused by the left hand, because the thumb bruise was on her right jaw, and the finger bruising was on the left side of her face - left hand holding head, right hand holding knife.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hello Trevor Marriott.

if the bruising on Nicholl,s face was caused by Jack the Ripper reaching around her... the marks described seem to indicate thatthey were made with a right hand. How could he hold her with his right and cut her with his right too? (Considering theleft-to-right cut)

There is no proof that the bruising referred to was as a result of her murder, it could easily have been from some previous incident.

For those who do not know, a full and comprehensive insight into the victims injuries and how it can now be shown that many of the Victorian doctors opinions that so many now rely were nothing more than guesswork by Dr Biggs, can be found here http://amzn.to/1RTiCO9

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Errata]

What the above is missing for context is that no matter how the killer adjusted his position he was always going to be with his back to the windows when he was mutilating. There was no room on the right hand side of the bed, there is no evidence that the bed position itself was altered by the killer, and that leaves us with an undeniable fact in the case of the Kelly murder. Based on the viscera on the nighttable and the fact that Kelly was first cut while lying on her right side facing the partition wall, its almost a cert that the killer cut with his left hand and placed with his right.

There is no other Canonical murder where the physical evidence compels us to conclude a left handed killer.

This is where handedness blinds us. Handedness only applies to what hand you write with. Writing is a very specific skill, it has very specific requirements. Wielding a knife to slash or stab is a different skill. Different specific requirements. And while handedness is born, and in fact genetic, knife wielding is not. It's a trained skill. Many people use a knife with the same hand they use to write. An almost equal amount do not, because their hands have developed differently. I cannot write with both hands, but I can wield a knife equally well in either hand because the strength of my interior grip (thumb and forefinger) and pinky is equal in both hands. Were it not equal, I would have a preferred hand for using a knife. But whatever hand that may be, it has no relationship at all to which hand I write with. Just like how you lace your shoes has nothing to do with the hand you write with.

This killer easily could have switched hands. Or not. Or he was right handed and a left handed slasher. Or vice versa. But the idea that he slashed with his left so he is ergo lefthanded is just false. It's not even true by a respectable majority. So the one thing we cannot do is look at what hand a man writes with, and say he is the killer because it's the same hand the killer used a knife with. We can't even say with any certainty that because this killer used his left in this murder that he used his left in all the murders. Or even most. That's just not how it works.

By the way, Europeans are more likely to be able to wield a knife in either hand than Americans because of the differences in table manners. If you do not switch the fork from the left to the right hand while eating, you are building up similar muscle structure. 20 years of doing it will give you pretty respectable left hand pinch strength. Which is the important part of wielding a knife.

[Michael W Richards]

In Kelly`s case the killer undoubtedly moved the body whilst mutilating her, and changed position himself...

What the above is missing for context is that no matter how the killer adjusted his position he was always going to be with his back to the windows when he was mutilating. There was no room on the right hand side of the bed, there is no evidence that the bed position itself was altered by the killer, and that leaves us with an undeniable fact in the case of the Kelly murder. Based on the viscera on the nighttable and the fact that Kelly was first cut while lying on her right side facing the partition wall, its almost a cert that the killer cut with his left hand and placed with his right.

There is no other Canonical murder where the physical evidence compels us to conclude a left handed killer.

[Robert St Devil]

I think you need to picture how soldiers are trained to kill when coming up behind other soldiers in order to kill quickly and silently.

Hand across the face. knife deep into the centre of the throat and drawn across.then releasing victim to fall to the floor.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hello Trevor Marriott.

if the bruising on Nicholl,s face was caused by Jack the Ripper reaching around her... the marks described seem to indicate thatthey were made with a right hand. How could he hold her with his right and cut her with his right too? (Considering theleft-to-right cut)

[Trevor Marriott]

Agreed. Bruising on her face must mean that the injury happened immediately prior to her death. Huge speculation but i,m thinking he covered her face with his left hand and made the 4 in. Incision first with the possibility that it was used to ,,bleed,, her. That, or he found that he was too close to her jaw, and readjusted for the second incision/cut.

Hard to say with her abdominal wounds. He could have stood anove her, and used each hand to make the cuts on both sides of her body. Or, he could have remained kneeling by her right side, lifted up her dress, and made the jagging cut on her left side; then made the 4 downward cuts on her right side; finishing it off by slicing across the abdomen.

I think you need to picture how soldiers are trained to kill when coming up behind other soldiers in order to kill quickly and silently.

Hand across the face. knife deep into the centre of the throat and drawn across.then releasing victim to fall to the floor.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Robert St Devil]

Hello Robert St Devil



In the Nichols case the killer held her head steady with his left hand (Dr Llewellyn at the inquest tells us that bruising on the lower part of the jaw on the right side could have been caused by the thumb, and the circular bruise on the left side of the face could have been caused by the fingers) and wielded the knife with his right hand.

Agreed. Bruising on her face must mean that the injury happened immediately prior to her death. Huge speculation but i,m thinking he covered her face with his left hand and made the 4 in. Incision first with the possibility that it was used to ,,bleed,, her. That, or he found that he was too close to her jaw, and readjusted for the second incision/cut.

Hard to say with her abdominal wounds. He could have stood anove her, and used each hand to make the cuts on both sides of her body. Or, he could have remained kneeling by her right side, lifted up her dress, and made the jagging cut on her left side; then made the 4 downward cuts on her right side; finishing it off by slicing across the abdomen.

[Errata]

Cheers chaps.
I was intrigued by the description of the knife seemingly being stabbed into, rather than drawn across, the throat. Makes it sound similar to Alice McKenzie's wounds.

Its the easiest way to kill someone, and a single stab will do it. But it requires a lot of working the knife back and forth to cut that way for any appreciable length.

[Joshua Rogan]

Cheers chaps.
I was intrigued by the description of the knife seemingly being stabbed into, rather than drawn across, the throat. Makes it sound similar to Alice McKenzie's wounds.

[Jon Guy]

In the case of Eddowes, Dr Brown stated that he believed the victim was lying on the ground when her throat was cut.
She had two abrasions on her left cheek and two slight abrasions under her left ear.

My guess is that the abrasions were caused by left hand fingernails whilst holding head steady.